Saturday, April 30, 2005

Prime Minister Tony Blair

I did a search on both web sites for British Prime Minister Tony Blair to see how each was covering the British election which Blair called for on April 5th. CNN had 37 articles about Blair and the election while Fox has had only three. Nine of the last 14 articles by CNN have addressed the Iraq War as an election issue. Fox’s three articles address Blair’s calling an election, the arrest of protestors, and Bill Clinton’s support of Blair. Here are the articles:


Blair, Howard play down Iraq issue (04.29.2005)
Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Conservative opponent Michael Howard tried to move the UK election battleground back onto the domestic agenda Friday after a week of wrangling over Iraq
War issue not reflected in polls (04.29.2005)
Was Iraq an illegal war? It is not just a question for British Prime Minister Tony Blair, but an election issue that will not disappear.
Is truth a casualty of election? (04.29.2005)
When will they ever learn? By delaying publication of Attorney General Lord Goldsmith's legal advice over the war in Iraq until it was dragged out of him by near total disclosure in the media, Tony Blair managed to turn a calamity into a disaster.
Blair avoiding face-to-face debate (04.29.2005)
When Tony Blair visited a South London school earlier in the campaign and was catcalled by some of the children, his entourage explained it away by saying that it wasn't booing at all, it was "booming" -- a particular form of greeting in the local rap-dominated subculture.
Blair fights 'war legality' charge (04.28.2005)
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has hit back at accusations he lied about the legal case for war in Iraq after opposition parties said a leaked document revealed ministers tried to cover up doubts.
Vote row over 'Blair lied' remarks
British opposition leader Michael Howard has been defending his personal attacks on Prime Minister Tony Blair, in which he has accused him of lying over the war in Iraq
Election battle turns personal (04.27.2005)
It is getting tough and it is getting personal. The L-word is now well and truly to the fore in this election. The Conservatives have unveiled a poster showing a shifty-looking Tony Blair and declaring: "If he's prepared to lie to take us to war he's prepared to lie to win an election."
Blair plays down 'half-time' lead (04.26.2005)
Conservative leader Michael Howard says publicly that his party is 2-0 down at half-time in the British election. Is that a "Beware of the Underdog" warning, a plea for sympathy or a shrewd election tactic?
Defection keeps Iraq heat on Blair (04.26.2005)
British Prime Minister Tony Blair was facing a fresh challenge over the Iraq war with the defection of an ex-Labour MP, although new polls showed Labour with a strong lead in the run-up to next week's election.
Does Howard regret dumping the blond? (04.25.2005)
The best thing about banging your head against the wall is when you get to stop doing so. Ten days out from polling day Britain's politicians must know the feeling.
Iraq factor: Blair's 34 words (04.25.2005)
In the run-up to the war in Iraq, British intelligence agents worked to find out what weapons Saddam Hussein may or may not have had.
Blair faces concerted Iraq attack (04.25.2005)
Iraq dominatedBritain's election debate at the start of the last full week of campaigning as Prime Minister Tony Blair was forced to defend himself against new attacks that he misled the country in the runup to the war.
Blair faces concerted Iraq attack (04.25.2005)
Prime Minister Tony Blair is facing demands for a new probe into the Iraq war as his rivals launched a concerted attack on him over the U.S.-led invasion for the first time in Britain's election campaign
Tory rival accuses Blair of 'lies'
Tony Blair's main rival accused him Sunday of lying over the Iraq war, seeking to damage the prime minister over an issue that could prove the weakest link in his campaign for reelection on May 5.
Soldier father bid to unseat Blair (04.21.2005)
An anti-Iraq war protester has taken his campaign to unseat Tony Blair to the Prime Minister's traditional stronghold.
UK top-selling paper backs Blair
There was a new boost for Prime Minister Tony Blair when Britain's biggest selling newspaper said it was backing him for re-election.
UK leaders turn high flyers (04.20.2005)
British politicians are taking to the air ahead of the coming election, using helicopters to high-tail it across the country and engage with the public on their own terms.
A-Z of British election issues (04.20.2005)
A is for Advertising, which at election times more than ever reminds us of George Orwell's definition of the trade: "The rattling of sticks in swill buckets."
Tory leader Howard under pressure (04.20.2005)
UK Conservative party leader Michael Howard was under pressure Tuesday with his party flagging in opinion polls and being attacked for his tough stand on immigration and asylum seekers.
Iraq looms over UK election battle
Iraq is featuring as a major issue in the UK election battle with several candidates from a new anti-war party standing against prominent MPs in Prime Minister Tony Blair's ruling Labour party.
Polls make election clear as mud (04.18.2005)
Voters have not yet been shaken or stirred in this so far rather mechanical election. But they must certainly be utterly bemused by the figures thrown at them.
Lib Dems: We are real opposition (04.15.2005)
Britain's Liberal Democrats launched their election platform Thursday saying they were the true opposition to Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Blair lead up in UK election race (04.15.2005)
British Prime Minister Tony Blair is on course for a record third straight election victory on May 5 but with a reduced majority, according to the latest opinion polls.
Blair's opponents (04.14.2005)
If Tony Blair is re-elected people will know what they are getting. As President George Bush's closest ally he has become well known on the international stage.
Blair unveils election platform
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has unveiled his party's list of promises for the election he hopes will make history by giving his center-left Labour party a third consecutive term.
Blair playing the 'team player' (04.13.2005)
Conservative leader Michael Howard has been chiding Tony Blair for being all words and no action. Risky then that Labour's manifesto, launched Wednesday, stretched to 112 pages compared with the 38 pages of Howard's own offering. But they were smaller pages.
Blair, Brown cozy up in TV film (04.12.2005)
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair is seeking to challenge reports that he is at loggerheads with Gordon Brown by starring in a soft-focus TV movie with his chief finance minister.
Blair still craves voters' love (04.12.2005)
The trouble with this British election is that the phoney war lasted so long before it that most of the parties had already dispensed their bribes and deployed most of their arguments.
Tories slam Blair 'broken pledges' (04.11.2005)
British opposition leader Michael Howard has attacked Prime Minister Tony Blair's "broken promises," saying: "I'm going into battle for Britain.
Tory leader's high-risk strategy (04.11.2005)
While some reveled in the royal wedding at the weekend others of us escaped to the Grand National, the greatest horse racing spectacle in the world.
Day Two: Howard up, up, up?
The final prime minister's question time of the 2001-2005 Parliament was a clear points victory for Conservative leader Michael Howard.
Blair, Howard clash on spending (04.07.2005)
Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed Thursday that his main political rivals would cripple investment in Britain's hospitals and schools, as the Conservatives tried to dampen a damaging row over their public spending plans.
Blair head-to-head with opponent (04.07.2005)
Prime Minister Tony Blair went head to head with Conservative challenger Michael Howard in lively exchanges in parliament with an election campaign in Britain firmly under way.
Day One: The memories flood back
Here we go again. In Downing Street amid the popping flashbulbs as Tony Blair sets off for Buckingham Palace to ask the queen to dissolve Parliament and hold an election on 05/05/05.
Polls show Blair lead slashed
Britain's opposition Conservative party has narrowed the gap on Prime Prime Minister Tony Blair's Labour Party, a clutch of opinion polls published Tuesday showed.
Blair calls election for May 5 (04.06.2005)
Prime Minister Tony Blair has called Britain's general election for May 5 after seeing the queen to ask for the dissolution of parliament.
Analysis: Can Blair make it three in a row?
Tony Blair took Labour back to power after 18 years with a landslide victory in 1997. He did it again in 2001. But can he achieve his ambition of becoming the first leader in his party's history to win it three full terms in a row?


Bill Clinton Endorses Tony Blair's Re-Election - Monday, April 25, 2005 - LONDON — Former President Clinton endorsed British Prime Minister Tony Blair's campaign to be elected for a third straight term during...
British Egg Tossers Nabbed - Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - LONDON — British police arrested two men on suspicion of throwing eggs at Prime Minister Tony Blair's (search) car at an election...
Blair Calls British General Election for May 5 - Tuesday, April 05, 2005 - LONDON — Prime Minister Tony Blair on Tuesday called a national election on May 5, triggering a four-week campaign that will test a...

Friday, April 29, 2005

Budget Resolution Passes

CNN and Fox ran similar, but different, AP stories on Congress passing a budget resolution. Much of the information was the same but there were some variations including who was quoted in the articles and how they were quoted. Both articles had pro and con comments. I did notice a difference however in how Bush was quoted in each. CNN’s quote of Bush speaks only to the budget being responsible with spending reigned in. Fox’s quote however is much more favorable to Bush by saying that the budget protects America, helps the economy, funds the priorities, and cuts the deficit. Here are the exact quotes used:

CNN said: President Bush praised the budget resolution. "This is a responsible budget that reins in spending to limits not seen in years," he said in a written statement.

Fox used this quote: President Bush, in a statement, said the budget plan "protects America, helps economic growth, funds our priorities and keeps us on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009."

Links to the articles:,2933,154902,00.html

Thursday, April 28, 2005

President Bush in Prime Time

CNN and Fox News had articles about President Bush’s prime time news conference. There are lots of differences which appear to be related to biases (sorry about the lengthy post today but there is so much to say). I will highlight four differences. (1) First of all, CNN has 1016 words while Fox’s article is about two and a half times as long at 2581 words. Is Fox adding more emphasis and significance to the President’s news conference or, conversely, is CNN reporting only the minimum necessary?

(2) Both report poll results concerning people’s opinions about Bush’s social security plans. CNN reports on a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll where “on the question of private accounts, 51 percent of respondents said they opposed such an idea and 45 percent said they supported it.” Fox, although admitting that “Americans remain confused” on personal investment accounts, stated that “53 percent overall said they are in favor of private accounts, with that number rising to 64 percent of people under age 55.”

(3) Concerning Iraq, CNN reported the following:

On international affairs, Bush said he has invited new Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari to come to the United States. "I hope he comes soon," Bush said. Iraq's transitional National Assembly earlier in the day chose a new government following three months of political wrangling in the wake of historic elections.

Fox’s information on Iraq, specifically, is much more positive:

Bush praised Iraqi civilians who have signed up in droves to join the military, and he gave details of a conversation he held with Iraq's incoming Prime Minister lbrahim Al-Jaafari, in which he confirmed Jaafari's commitment to getting a constitution and a permanent assembly. He said he also invited him to come to the United States.

"There are a lot of courageous people in Iraq that are making a big difference in the lives of that country. I also want to caution you all that it's not easy to go from a tyranny to a democracy. We didn't pass sovereignty but about 10 months ago. And since that time a lot of progress has been made," he said.

(4) On John Bolton’s nomination to the U.N., CNN states the following which has a small quote from Bush and a reminder of the postponement of the vote due to a Republican siding, in part, with the Democrats:

Bush restated his support for his nominee to be ambassador to the United Nations, saying John Bolton "isn't afraid to speak his mind" and is the right person for the job. "John Bolton is a blunt guy," he said. "John Bolton can get the job done at the United Nations."

The Foreign Relations Committee postponed a vote on Bolton's nomination last week after a Republican member, Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, joined Democrats in asking for more time to investigate fresh allegations about the nominee's past conduct.

Fox, on the other hand, said the following which blames the Democrats for stalling the confirmation and adds more content from Bush than CNN had:

Bush also defended John Bolton, whom the president nominated to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton's confirmation has been stalled by Democrats who say his temper is too nasty to take the top U.S. diplomatic post in the world body.

"John Bolton is a blunt guy. Sometimes people say I'm little too blunt. ... It seemed like to me it made sense to put somebody who's capable, smart, served our country for 20 years, been confirmed by the United States Senate four times and who isn't afraid to speak his mind in the post of the ambassador to the U.N.," Bush said, adding that the United Nations is in need of reforms and Bolton is committed to seeing them through.

Links to the articles:,2933,154962,00.html

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Abortion: Parental Consent

“The House passed a bill that would make it illegal to dodge parental-consent laws by taking minors across state lines for abortions…” That is the start of both articles by CNN and Fox. Much of the opening and closing is exactly identical and that is not surprising since they both attribute their articles to the AP. However, Fox’s article is longer and has additional information not in CNN’s article. So, what happened here? I can think of three possibilities: (1) The AP put out different versions of the articles at different times; or (2) Fox added information; or (3) CNN deleted information. I do not know what actually happened. Here is a summary of the extra in Fox’s article:

* Quotes from President Bush’s statement praising the House’s actions.

* Information about a Democratic supporter: “In another sign of the measure's new support, Democratic Rep. William Clay of Missouri, who staunchly favors abortion rights and voted against the measure in the past, voted for it on Wednesday. Clay said he switched in response to an outpouring of support for the bill from constituents in his St. Louis district. "This bill simply says that a parent has a right to know if their child is having surgery," Clay said.”

* Vote totals by party.

* This statement: “If passed by the Senate and signed by the president, the policy would represent the fifth measure since Bush took office in 2001 aimed at reducing the number of abortions.”

* A number of exceptions; i.e., life of the mother, waivers of parental notification, and “minors who have signed a written statement saying that she is a victim of sexual abuse by a parent and can back it up with documentation of having reported that abuse to a state authority.”

* This statement: “The House rejected two Democratic amendments that would have added immunity from prosecution and civil suits confidants of the minor who help transport her — such as grandparents and clergy — and others involved in the violation, such as taxicab and bus drivers.”

There was one statement in CNN’s article that was not in Fox’s: “Supporters of the interstate abortion bill say it would be worthwhile if it prevented a single abortion.”

Links to the articles:,2933,154809,00.html

President Bush - Energy - Photos

President Bush delivered a speech on energy. Fox News ran an AP story and CNN ran their own. Fox’s article was 61% longer than CNN’s and had a lot more information, including opposing views. CNN’s was very straightforward and gave just the basic facts of the speech. Both articles had a picture of President Bush. Often, the pictures used on both sites are the same or comparable. In this case however, CNN’s picture shows a close-mouthed Bush while Fox’s picture presents an animated, strong President.

CNN's photo

Fox's photo (AP)
Posted by Hello

Links to the articles:,2933,154734,00.html

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Compromise on Judicial Nominees?

CNN and Fox News had articles this morning on attempts by Senate leaders to reach a compromise on judicial nominations. It seems to me that Fox’s perspective has Senators Frist and Reid working on an agreement together while CNN has the initiative with Democratic Senator Reid. Fox’s headline is "Frist, Reid Try for Judicial Nom Agreement" while CNN’s headline is "Reid seeks compromise with Frist on judges." The first sentences keep those same perspectives:

FOX: The lobs from the two Senate party leaders have been coming fast and furious, but Minority Leader Harry Reid and Majority Leader Bill Frist have apparently been working on a truce behind the scenes.

CNN: The Senate's top Democrat said Monday he is still working with his Republican counterpart, Majority Leader Bill Frist, in hopes of defusing a standoff over some of President Bush's judicial nominees.

Links to the articles:,2933,154571,00.html

Sunday, April 24, 2005

Resignation from Oil-for-Food Investigation Panel

Both had articles today on a statement made by Robert Parton concerning his resignation from Volcker's panel which is investigating the United Nations oil-for-food scandal. There were some reports that Parton's work, and that of a colleague, was finished. However, his statement says that he resigned on principle, as a protest of a report clearing Kofi Annan. In the past I have noted that Fox News is tougher than CNN on the United Nations and Annan (or perhaps CNN is easier on the U.N.). The articles today are no exception. CNN ran their own article and Fox ran an AP article. As is often typical, the headlines show the biases. Fox's is “Former Oil-for-Food Investigator Criticizes Panel” which is more negative towards the panel as opposed to CNN's “Oil-for-food man quit on principle.” CNN's first sentence notes that Parton “disputed a report that he did so because his work was finished” while Fox's first sentence takes it from a different angle with a reason behind the principle and says Parton “resigned to protest a report clearing ... Annan ...” Fox's article is about twice as long with more information including this statement which is not in CNN's report:

Following Pieth's statement, another committee member, Richard Goldstone, discounted reports that the two investigators had left the Independent Inquiry Committee because they believed the report was too soft on the secretary-general.
A person close to Parton said his contract ran until August and he left because he was upset with conclusions in the report and disagreed with how the committee reached those findings. Speaking on condition of anonymity at Parton's request, he also said Parton, a lawyer and former FBI agent, issued his statement because he believed that Goldstone had knowingly misrepresented the reason he left.
Responding to Parton's statement, a spokesman for the committee accused the former employee of trying to expand his mandate Saturday.
It is the responsibility of investigators only to gather facts and bring them to the committee, not to provide opinion," Mike Holtzman said. "It is the committee that renders judgment on the facts and to put it bluntly, the investigators were not paid for their opinions."
Holtzman added that all the facts uncovered by the investigators were included in the report.
But Parton, who was assigned to write two drafts of the report, believes that the final version omitted material facts, the person close to him said.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

-a note to readers-

I've been doing this blog since last November and I really enjoy it. I have been able to post something almost every day. To the regular readers of this blog, I am going out of town and will not be able to post anything for about three days. I'll see you all soon though.

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Student Sentenced for Eco-Vandalism

Both ran stories on a graduate student who was sentenced to prison for helping to vandalize and burn sport utility vehicles. CNN ran a Reuters story while Fox ran an AP story. The articles are similar but there are some minor differences that reflect biases with regard to the environment. Certainly neither article and neither organization would condone the actions of William Cottrell; but, CNN is slightly more sympathetic to Cottrell.

First of all, in the opening sentence CNN refers to Cottrell as an “aspiring physicist” which sounds more prestigious than Fox’s “Caltech graduate student.” CNN talks of his “role in a spree of arson and vandalism” whereas Fox uses the mush harsher “helping to firebomb” the cars. CNN uses “gas-guzzling Hummers and other sports utility vehicles” whereas Fox leaves out the adjectives and just says “sport utility vehicles.”

This was noted by CNN but not mentioned in Fox’s article:

Cottrell's attorneys asked for the five-year mandatory minimum sentence saying that their client has Asperger's syndrome -- a form of autism marked by impaired ability to understand social situations.

This was noted by Fox that was not in CNN’s article:

However, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner said Cottrell had engaged in domestic terrorism and "we're very, very lucky" that no one was killed in the arson attacks.

CNN has this information from the prosecutor: "The defendant engaged in conduct to send a political message," said federal prosecutor Beverly Reid O'Connell. "He's a scheming, arrogant person who is disdainful of the law and the justice system." Fox made a similar statement but stronger with: “At his trial, the prosecution had accused Cottrell of "arrogance" and a "towering superiority" toward people who did not share his environmental views. Cottrell had testified that SUV dealers were evil.”

Links to the articles:,2933,153886,00.html

Monday, April 18, 2005

Howard Dean and Terri Schiavo

Both posts tonight have to do with identical AP stories with different, biased headlines. This time it is about an AP story of Howard Dean accusing “congressional Republicans of ‘grandstanding’ in the Terri Schiavo case.” He added that “his party will use it against the GOP in coming elections.” Fox’s headline is “Dean: Schiavo Debate to Be Issue in '06” whereas CNN’s headline is more negatively directed at the Republicans with “Dean: Schiavo case will hurt GOP.”

Links to the articles:,2933,153705,00.html

Republican National Committee Fundraising

This is another case of identical AP stories with different headlines, headlines that show potential bias. The story is about the amount of money that the Republican National Committee has raised during the first quarter of this year. CNN says “Republicans raise more than $32 million.” Fox, however, adds some meaning to the amount by saying “RNC Hits New Fund-Raising Record.” CNN’s is just an amount that is hard for most to relate to. Fox identifies the amount as a record which certainly says more about how the RNC is really doing.

Incidentally, I could click on this article from Fox’s “Politics” section page but I could not find a link on CNN’s “Inside Politics” page even though it has the older story about the Dems slamming Schwarzenegger. I was able to find it through CNN’s search feature.

Links to the articles:,2933,153803,00.html

Sunday, April 17, 2005

Odds & Ends: DeLay, Schwarzenegger, Democrats' Radio Address

Just some odds and ends today:

1. Tom DeLay spoke at the NRA convention. CNN and Fox ran identical AP articles but the headlines they chose are different with Fox’s headline being a little more friendly to DeLay:

CNN: Embattled DeLay rips media

Fox: DeLay Finds Friends Among NRA,2933,153686,00.html

2. Democrats spoke out against Governor Schwarzenegger at the annual California Democratic convention. Again, the articles are from the AP and identical. The headlines are similar. But, CNN added emphasis to this statement, referring to the Governor’s “girlie men” comment, by choosing to add a picture:

“…while others carried bobblehead dolls depicting the Republican governor in a pink dress with an automatic rifle strapped to his shoulder.”

CNN AP photo
Posted by Hello

CNN: California Dems denounce Schwarzenegger

Fox: California Democrats Lash Out at Schwarzenegger,2933,153699,00.html

3. Every Saturday the President gives a weekly radio address. The Democrats choose someone from their party every week to give their weekly radio address. I’ve noticed that Fox is often slow to run the Democratic address. At the time of this posting, it is 24 hours after the addresses. Fox ran the President’s transcript right away Saturday morning but there still is no mention of the Democratic address. Here is a link to CNN’s article on the Democratic response:

Governor: States show how bipartisanship works (04.16.2005)
The quality of Americans' lives is improving in states with Democratic governors, and congressional leaders should follow that example to cut through partisan gridlock, West Virginia's governor said Saturday.

Saturday, April 16, 2005

Pakistan Detains Opposition Leader

Fox News ran an AP story while CNN ran their own on Pakistan detaining an opposition leader, Asif Ali Zardari. There clearly are differences in the coverage and a reader of just one source would have a different impression of what happened than a reader of the other. In the table below I show some examples of the differences. It would seem that Fox’s AP article is a little more favorable to the Pakistani government.




Was it a violent “storming” of the plane or was Zardari just “whisked off”?

security forces have stormed a plane carrying opposition leader Asif Ali Zardari and detained him as he arrived in the country him as he arrived in the country

was whisked off a plane and spirited away by police upon his return from a trip overseas

Was he under arrest or not?

government and police authorities said he was in "protective custody."

was taken from the airport and dropped at his home …

Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said the party officials and activists would soon be freed and denied claims Zardari had been arrested. …

"Police dropped him at his home in Lahore and he must be having his breakfast by now," Ahmed told The Associated Press. "Asif Ali Zardari is a free person. He can go anywhere."

Did Zadari request protective custody?

The opposition leader was also be allowed to hold prayers at a local shrine later Saturday, Masoor said.

Zardari told Masoor [Shahid Masoor, director of the ARY News Channel] he did not request protective custody.

Chief Minister of Punjab province Chaudhry Pervez Elahi told Geo television that police provided "security" for Zardari. "He said he is worried about his security, and we sent police to Lahore airport to safely drop him at his home on his request."

Were the journalists “beaten” as CNN describes or “manhandled” as Fox says?

Journalists on the plane told CNN their cameras were taken from them and they were beaten.

ARY television reported that police at the airport manhandled journalists who traveled with Zardari from Dubai, snatching away their cameras.

This is information mentioned by Fox but not CNN.

The planned rally was a carefully orchestrated bid by the opposition to boost the political profile of Zardari

He claimed the opposition, which had offered to pay the airfares of journalists who agreed to return with Zardari on the flight from Dubai, was intentionally trying to create problems.

This is noted by CNN but not Fox.

dozens of PPP activists suffered injuries when police charged them in front of the Karachi Railway Station. Police were trying to stop PPP activists from boarding trains for Lahore.

At least two journalists were listed in critical condition from injuries they suffered in the melee.

Links to the articles:,2933,153662,00.html

Global Warming Coverage -- Part 2

Two months ago I reported that CNN had more coverage on global warming than Fox News. On February 12th I checked the previous 30 days and found that CNN had 11 articles to Fox’s four ( That trend continues as I check it again today for the last 30 days. CNN has 11 articles to Fox’s three. Of the three Fox articles, two are from its “Junk Science” section.


Seeking solutions to a cooler planet (04.15.2005)
The answer to global warming may be blowing in the wind. It's probably also driving on four wheels and could be in your next tank of gas.
Canada plans to cut greenhouse gases (04.13.2005)
Canada plans to spend about $10 billion (US$8 billion) over the next seven years to meet Canada's Kyoto targets under an implementation plan released Wednesday.
Past may hold clues to climate's future (04.12.2005)
Climate change could have drastic consequences.
University to research melting polar ice caps (04.12.2005)
A new federally funded center will give the University of Kansas a prominent role in researching global warming, the melting of polar ice caps and their effects on the world's climate.
Greenhouse gas market to slow global warming (04.08.2005)
Hot air is now for sale.
The science debate behind climate change (04.08.2005)
Is global warming really a threat?
Challenges ahead for a changing Earth (04.08.2005)
In 1969, the Cuyahoga River flowing past Cleveland, Ohio, caught fire and burned noxious sludge from steel mills, paint factories and sewage plants. In California, an offshore drilling rig stained the coast of Santa Barbara with more than 3 million gallons of crude oil. The skies of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, home to the nation's steel industry, were so dark with soot that drivers sometimes had to turn on their headlights during the day.
Commentary: Global warming sizzles in pop culture (04.08.2005)
Amid the devastation of World War I, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau famously proclaimed, "War is far too important to be left to the generals."
A truly global problem (04.08.2005)
While the recent implementation of the Kyoto Protocol marked a key milestone, international accord on how best to address climate change remains elusive, as doomsday scientific forecasts clash with thorny political realities.

Report: Earth's ecosystem at risk (04.08.2005)
Humans are damaging the planet at an unprecedented rate and raising risks of abrupt collapses in nature that could spur disease, deforestation or "dead zones" in the seas, an international report said on Wednesday.

Government to track greenhouse gas reductions (04.08.2005)
The government will start keeping track of all the "greenhouse" gases that farmers and foresters voluntarily reduce to help combat global warming.


Global Warming Tax - Friday, April 08, 2005 - Duke Energy, a leading U.S. electricity and gas utility, announced this week its support for a global warming tax (search) —...

Second Global Warming Treaty Makes Less Sense Than First - Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., suggested last week that it’s time for a second global warming treaty (search) to reduce greenhouse gas...

Conference Examines Nuclear Energy - Monday, March 21, 2005 - PARIS — The head of the U.N.'s Atomic Energy Agency (search) on Monday trumpeted the benefits of nuclear power as consumers demand...

Friday, April 15, 2005

GOP and Judicial Filibuster Rules

CNN and Fox ran articles on GOP efforts to go on the offensive, and counteract liberal ads, in trying to eliminate judicial filibusters. CNN ran an AP article while Fox News ran their own, with contributions from the AP. I did a sentence for sentence comparison and found virtually all of CNN’s AP article in Fox’s article (the exception being just two sentences about Senate rules). Fox added some additional information, both pro and con. The information is listed below. When I first saw that they had run different articles about a very hot political issue, I expected that a lot of bias would show through. However, the information added by Fox seems even-handed. They just provided more information. If you want to see the additional information, read on.

Regarding a flyer for a pro-Republican event sponsored by the Family Research Council, Fox had this (not found in CNN’s article):

Under the flier's heading, "the filibuster against people of faith," it reads: "The filibuster was once abused to protect racial bias, and it is now being used against people of faith."

Fox added a significant section about the event and other issues. Here is an excerpt:

"At this moment, there are those who are planning what I consider to be an assault on very base of Constitution," Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said on the Senate floor Friday. "Those who wish to change the rules of the Senate and defy tradition, change rules in the middle of the game and have a full frontal assault on the unique nature of this institution … that, I think, is an abusive power. It goes way too far. [It] ignores the founding fathers, the Constitution, rules of the senate [and] for what? So the president of the United States can have every single judicial nominee approved by the Senate?" …

Durbin also assailed news of the Family Research Council event -- first reported in The New York Times Friday -- portraying Democrats as "people against faith."

He said these filibusters are "not an issue of religion," but of whether the nominees abide by the Constitution. "In 10 cases out of 215, the nominees did not pass that test," Durbin added.

Later, in an informal briefing with reporters, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said he was quite upset that people would suggest his party was against people of faith. "God does not take part in partisan politics," said the Nevada lawmaker. "I do know God cares about poor people, sick people, widows, orphans ... I think those are moral issues."

Reid, a Nevada Democrat and a Mormon, called it "beyond the pale" for Frist to agree to participate in the telecast. Durbin called it "outrageous." Reid said that America is a democracy, "not a theocracy and for now Senator Frist to say that he's going to participate in this event in Kentucky next week is beyond the pale."

Fox then ended with this information that was not in CNN’s article:

Former Clinton White House counsel Jack Quinn told FOX News on Friday that the idea that conservatives would paint Democrats as "people against faith" is "particularly galling."

"I think that in politics, most Americans think that any one political wing trying to capture religion and faith as their own is plain and simply, offensive. What's going on here is a war between the … fundamental institutions of American democracy."

But former Whitewater counsel Robert Bittman said Republicans are doing what they can to live up to their constitutional advise and consent obligations and to get an up-or-down vote on the president's judicial picks,

"What is absolutely clear is that the nominations that are being held up by the Democrats … are absolutely 100 percent qualified to be federal judges," Bittman told FOX News. "It's really discouraging that the Senate is holding up these people and won't even allow a vote."

Links to the articles:,2933,153616,00.html

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

Tom DeLay's Apology

CNN and Fox ran stories today on House Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s statement about a controversial comment he had made regarding some judges involved in the Terri Schiavo case. The story in essence can be stated in a two-word, noun-verb sentence, “DeLay apologized.” Both use DeLay’s title so we can add that adjective phrase and we have the following:

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay apologized.

But, that is not a particularly interesting or informative opening statement. How each chooses to embellish gives away some of the bias of Fox and CNN. Here are the opening sentences from each article:

FOX: House Majority Leader Tom DeLay apologized Wednesday for using overheated rhetoric on the day Terri Schiavo died, but refused to say whether he supports impeachment of the judges who ruled in her case.

CNN: House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, riding out a political storm over allegations he took trips that were paid for by lobbyists, tried to put to rest another swirling controversy Wednesday: his threats of retribution against judges involved in the Terri Schiavo case.

Fox starts with the basic story sentence that I mentioned at the start of this posting and then adds more information. Fox uses the term “overheated rhetoric” which sounds much softer than CNN’s “threats of retribution against judges.” Fox mentions that it happened on “the day Terri Schiavo died” which makes DeLay’s comment sound more emotional perhaps. More excusable?

CNN takes this opportunity to add that DeLay is “riding out a political storm over allegations he took trips that were paid for by lobbyists.” CNN also calls this “another swirling controversy.” It is not just a controversy but a “swirling” controversy that he is “trying to put to rest.”

Fox adds that DeLay “refused to say whether he supports impeachment of the judges” which leaves that issue still open.

Links to the articles:,2933,153401,00.html

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Bolton, Part 3

The articles on Bolton’s hearing have gotten progressively more blatant as far as bias goes. Starting with today’s headlines, Fox has “Panel likely to confirm Bolton on party line” compared to CNN’s “Ex-intelligence official: Bolton bullied analyst” with a sub-headline of “U.N. nominee blasted at Senate hearing.” Fox notes that there was “scathing testimony” against Bolton but Fox clearly has Bolton on the road to being appointed with comments like this that are not found in CNN’s article:

John R. Bolton appeared a step closer to confirmation …

But the pivotal Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, said he was "still inclined" to vote to confirm Bolton, … The Constitution gives Bush considerable leeway to name ambassadors and "I see the bar as very high" for rejecting his choices, Chafee told reporters after the hearing was adjourned.

With Republicans in the majority, Bolton's nomination could be approved by the committee Thursday or early next week. Bolton was probably more vulnerable in the committee because Republicans outnumber Democrats there only 10-8. They have a safer margin, 55 to 44 with one independent, in the full Senate.

Dodd said in an interview, "If this isn't enough I don't know what you can do" to derail the Bolton nomination. But he said he had not been told that any Republican would oppose confirmation.

The chairman, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said the "paramount issue" was giving President Bush the nominee he wants to undertake reform at the United Nations. "Bluntness may not be very good diplomacy, but on occasion it may be required," Lugar said as the hearing drew to a close.

CNN has stronger negative information from Democratic Senators Boxer and Biden as well as Carl Ford who testified against Bolton. CNN adds some comments from Monday’s hearing as part of that. Here are some staements used by CNN but not found in Fox’s article.

From Senator Boxer: "My overall assessment, Mr. Bolton, is that you have nothing but disdain for the United Nations. It's hard for me to know why you'd want to work at an institution that you said didn't even exist."

From Senator Biden: "We need a strong voice in New York who knows the U.N. and who can advance our reform agenda. But we don't need a voice which people may not be inclined to listen to," Biden said. "And I fear that, knowing your reputation -- and your reputation known well at the U.N. -- people will be inclined to tune you out."

From Carl Ford, Jr.: "There are a lot of screamers that work in the government, but you don't pull someone so low down in the bureaucracy that they are completely defenseless. It's an 800-pound gorilla devouring a banana. The analyst was required simply to stand there and to take it."

Links to the articles:,2933,153157,00.html

Monday, April 11, 2005

Bolton, Part 2

CNN and Fox ran stories of John Bolton’s first day before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Fox’s article was longer and more information, both pro and con. But, both articles had the same basic facts. There are just a few subtle differences indicating that CNN is more against Bolton, or that Fox is more pro-Bolton. First of all, the headlines are different. Fox has a more positive statement with the headline of “Bolton pledges to 'work with all'.” CNN’s article is an AP article with the more matter-of-fact headline of “U.N. nominee faces Senate panel.” There some interesting differences in the first sentences which are basically the same except that CNN calls Bolton a “blunt diplomat” (true statement but are they emphasizing what some see as a negative quality?) and CNN adds this: “… is opposed by most Democrats and a chunk of the foreign policy establishment.” Opposition is not mentioned in Fox’s opener. Here are the sentences:

CNN: John R. Bolton, a blunt diplomat whose nomination as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. is opposed by most Democrats and a chunk of the foreign policy establishment, pledged Monday to help strengthen a world body that has occasionally "gone off track."

FOX: President Bush's pick to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations pledged Monday to "work with all" to build a stronger and more effective world body, which he said has sometimes gone "off track."

Links to the articles:,2933,153054,00.html

Sunday, April 10, 2005

Nominee for U.N., John Bolton, Senate Hearing

CNN and Fox had articles talking about what is predicted to be a contentious confirmation hearing of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. CNN had an AP article and Fox News had their own to which they credit contributions from the AP. Many of the facts in the articles are similar with both providing pro and con information from Republicans and Democrats. Fox, however, does add a statement from a Democratic strategist that points towards a predicted successful appointment eventually. Fox also adds a statement from a Republican strategist who suggests that Democratic opposition is more of a protest against the 2004 election results.

Democratic Strategist, Bob Beckel

Republican Strategist, Paul Manafort

… Beckel said that in the end he didn't think Democrats would try to mount a filibuster or other type of procedural block to Bolton.

"They've stirred up a few things but they're not going to break a pick on it. He's going to get approved and he's going to be at the U.N. and at that point we'll see," Beckel told FOX News.

… [Manafort] told FOX News that Democratic opposition to Bolton represents more of a protest against the 2004 election results than an attack on Bolton's abilities.

"These are people who represent the philosophy of the administration that won the election in November, and the Democrats are trying not to oppose the candidates by virtue of their qualifications but by virtue of what they stand for, and they lost that election," Manafort said. "John Bolton is more than qualified to be U.N. ambassador."

Links to the articles:,2933,153011,00.html

Saturday, April 09, 2005

Protest in Baghdad

Right from the headlines you can see biased perspectives on the protest in Baghdad today on the second anniversary of the fall of Baghdad. Fox’s AP article is more favorable to the Bush administration and the situation in Iraq whereas CNN’s article is more negative. For those who just quickly scan the headlines without reading the articles, think about how these headlines would give different impressions:

CNN: Iraqi protesters: ‘No, no to America

FOX: Shiites mark anniversary of fall of Baghdad

In those headlines, CNN emphasizes getting U.S. forces out of Iraq while Fox emphasizes the fact that the Shiites are happy Saddam is gone. Even if the articles are read, the headlines can frame the readers’ perspectives.

There are other differences as well:

* CNN notes that the protesters condemned the “triangle of death” meaning Bush, Blair and Saddam. Fox also talks about the protesters being against all three. Fox however makes this statement that is not found in CNN’s article [bold added]: “their large numbers reflected frustration both with the U.S. government and anger toward the Sunni Arab-led insurgency.” CNN does not address anger towards insurgents.

* On U.S. withdrawal, CNN says this that is not found in Fox’s article: “Several countries in the U.S.-led coalition have announced plans to withdraw their forces, including Ukraine, which began bringing service members home about a month ago.” Is CNN trying to emphasize that others are leaving and implying that we should be too? Is Fox avoiding that observation? CNN makes the point, as does Fox, that U.S. officials refuse to provide a timeline for troop withdrawal. But look at the statement that Fox uses to precede that fact: “U.S. officials, who are slowly handing security to Iraqi forces, have refused to set a timetable for withdrawal,…” Fox is emphasizing that the U.S. is handing over security to the Iraqis, albeit slowly.

* Both articles talk about radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s role in the protest. CNN mentions only that the demonstrators were followers of al-Sadr. Fox notes that but later adds that al-Sadr had organized the protest. Fox also adds that the number of protesters “fell far short of the 1 million people he hoped would assemble.” With that statement, Fox portrays it as less successful than hoped.

* Fox makes this statement, not found in CNN’s article: “Al-Sadr has wide support among impoverished and young Shiites but overall fewer followers than Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the most revered Shiite cleric in the country.” Without that statement, CNN readers may have a different perspective of the views of the Shiites.

* Note: Fox does mention some other things, not mentioned by CNN, that are more negative towards the U.S. such as the protesters acting out prison abuse scenes and other protest throughout the country.

Links to the articles:,2933,152946,00.html

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

Pope: Critics

I’ll watch this more over the next few days/weeks but both CNN and Fox have had some articles about the Pope’s conservative and traditionalist values. I’ve listed below some articles from both over the last few days. CNN’s articles speak more to desired reform on the part of critics than Fox.


Pope's ban on contraception caused rift (04.06.2005)
Rosa Maria Domingos Soares, a 52-year-old Brazilian housemaid and passionate Catholic, fondly remembers her grandparents' family.

Pope's reign full of contradictions, critics say (04.04.2005)
As world leaders hailed Pope John Paul as a force for peace, Catholic reformers critical of his traditionalist stand on Church dogmas took issue with his 26-year papacy, which ended with his death on Saturday.

Poll: U.S. Catholics would support changes (04.03.2005)
A majority of U.S. Catholics surveyed want the next pope to have a theological outlook similar to that of Pope John Paul II, but they would also like to see changes on issues such as birth control, stem cell research and allowing priests to marry, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Sunday.


Papal Electors Bring New List of Concerns - Sunday, April 03, 2005 - VATICAN CITY — The last time the College of Cardinals (search) gathered to select a pope, the Cold War (search) dominated the globe,...

The Pope's Successor May Disappoint Church Critics - Thursday, March 31, 2005 - Dr. William Donohue Those who are banking on the next pope to be someone who will undo much of the work of Pope John Paul II are in for a...

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

Iraq: Optimism or Pessimism

Readers would have different perceptions on the latest update in Iraq if they just read only CNN or only Fox News. Fox ran an AP story with the headline “Iraq prepares to name new president.” CNN ran its own story with the main headline of “Car bombs kill U.S. soldier; Iraqi.” The sub-headline has to do with a new Iraqi president: “Kurd expected to become president while Saddam watches.” CNN opens with “Iraq’s political process inched forward as violence continued…” saying, in effect, that progress is slow and there still is a lot of violence going on. After talking about the violence they move to news on the Iraqi government. I am not saying that CNN is wrong, just that they chose to lead with the violence. Fox also had choices and they chose to lead with progress on the new government and was more celebratory in tone as seen by this opening sentence:

Ousted dictator Saddam Hussein will be able to watch from his Baghdad jail cell as Iraq's newly elected parliament chooses a new president Wednesday, the next step in building Iraq's first democratically elected government in 50 years, Iraqi officials said.

Fox then covers the violence later in the article.

So, if you read Fox you would probably be more optimistic on Iraq and if you read CNN you would be more pessimistic.

Links to the articles:,2933,152460,00.html